Which Sachs chain?
Brian Nystrom
Sam Bond wrote:
> I want to get a new chain for my recumbent - which means I have to buy 3 to
> get one long enough. The cycle is fitted with an 8 speed Shimano LX gear
> set.
>
> Asking at all my local LBS in the UK I get the answer "I must use an
> 8-speed chain" - but it is already fitted with a chain that is just
> labelled "SACHS" with no other designation and looks very much like a PC41.
> When buying 3 chains the price is rather important (I'm not a high
> performance cyclist!-) and the SACHS PC range that I've seen advertised is
>
> PC41 at £4.25
> PC51 at £5.25
> PC80 at £8.95
> PC91 at £12.99
>
> Of course only the more expensive chains are called "8-speed". There seems
> to be a very extensive range of Sachs chains but a hunt through AltaVista
> and DejaNews doesn't yield (for me anyway) and information on the types and
> specs of chains available.
>
> Does Sachs have a web page with specifications hidden anywhere?
> Do I really need an "8-speed" chain - are they really narrower than others
> or is there some other difference?
>
> Sam
All of the chains you have listed are 8 speed compatible. The main differences
are in plating and peening of the rivets. If you're a fair weather cyclist, any
of them will work. If you ride in all weather conditions, you may want to spend
the extra money for the better chains, as they are less prone to rusting. Since
the chain angle on most recumbents is so small, I doubt that there will be much
difference in durability, as long as you keep it properly lubricated (try Pro
Link).
--
TO REPLY: Remove the *** from my email address.
Regards
Brian
Matt O'Toole
them. The real difference between them is the riveting.
The more expensive ones are more solidly riveted, and should
be less prone to breakage when shifting under load. There
are differences in finish, too, but I don't think that
matters at all.
Sachs recommends using only the "50" and above for mountain
biking, but I've used the "40" chains with success. You may
wish to consider the torque the chain experiences on your
recumbent. It's probably more than on a mountain bike, due
to a heavier bike and rider combo, and lower gearing. If
you shift under load a lot, you may want a stronger chain.
There is a new "PC" series of Sachs chains, which have the
"Powerlink," and stronger riveting. The Powerlink allows
you to remove your chain without pushing pins out and
weakening it. This is a good idea if you remove your chain
a lot for cleaning. The new rivets are stronger, too, and
you may do well to get one of the new chains, depending on
the cost.
Those are really good prices you quoted, however, about half
of what we usually have to pay over here (for once).
Matt O.
CV2572
<bnys...@bit-net.com> writes:
>If you ride in all weather conditions, you may want to spend
>the extra money for the better chains, as they are less prone to rusting.
Pardon me for asking, but isn't the chain rust thing a moot point if regular
maintenance is performed (like, routinely)? I'm also thinking that surface
rust is easily removed by mechanical processes, eh? I am of the belief that
this does not significantly shorten the life of the chain, provided the bike is
ridden often enough.
I wonder because I can find no information from Sachs that would suggest that
any of their chains wear better, or are stronger, than the others (PC's 41-61;
the two high-end chains - road and mtn - have stronger pin rivetings). Thus, I
find it hard to justify the increased cost.
Anyone care to set me straight?
Thanks,
Robin Hubert
Hans-Joachim Zierke
Sam Bond schrieb:
> PC41 at £4.25
> PC51 at £5.25
> PC80 at £8.95
> PC91 at £12.99
As long as you do not perform very forceful front shifts, take the 41.
hajo
Brian Nystrom
CV2572 wrote:
Rust can be an issue, depending on the conditions you ride in and the type of chain
lube you use. White Lightning, for instance, does almost nothing to prevent rust.
External rust is not a big deal unless it's allow to progress to the point of
seriously weakening the chain. Internal rust, however, can dramatically accellerate
the wear on a chain.
I'm not sure if there are differences in the materials between the Sachs chains,
but I suspect there are. I've broken a SC-40 twice on a mountain bike, but the
SC-M90 that I replaced it with has been bulletproof (so far). This may be due to
the superior riveting on the SC-M90, however. Also, the plating on the links helps
reduce wear (it's much harder than the base metal) and friction during shifts.
Ole Yode
I recently installed a Sachs 80 on our tandem. Itseems to work fine. the trick
is the Sachs Master Link. Don`t try to put one side on then the other. First
make sure the link is on the top of the chain, then line up both holes, the hit
the pedal and it should snap right on.
Yode
Paul Kopit
Lightning lubed chain. Next morning, when I went to clean up the
machine, chain was rusted.
Don't get caught in big rain with WL.
On 23 Aug 1998 19:46:16 GMT, cv2...@aol.com (CV2572) wrote:
>In article <35E02F3B...@bit-net.com>, Brian Nystrom
><bnys...@bit-net.com> writes:
>
>>If you ride in all weather conditions, you may want to spend
>>the extra money for the better chains, as they are less prone to rusting.
>
> Pardon me for asking, but isn't the chain rust thing a moot point if regular
>maintenance is performed (like, routinely)? I'm also thinking that surface
>rust is easily removed by mechanical processes, eh? I am of the belief that
>this does not significantly shorten the life of the chain, provided the bike is
>ridden often enough.
> I wonder because I can find no information from Sachs that would suggest that
>any of their chains wear better, or are stronger, than the others (PC's 41-61;
>the two high-end chains - road and mtn - have stronger pin rivetings). Thus, I
>find it hard to justify the increased cost.
>
> Anyone care to set me straight?
>
> Thanks,
>
>Robin Hubert
*** Also Respond via Email to paul-...@att.net ***
Hans-Joachim Zierke
Brian Nystrom schrieb:
> I'm not sure if there are differences in the materials between the Sachs chains,
> but I suspect there are.
You lose.
> the superior riveting on the SC-M90, however. Also, the plating on the links helps
> reduce wear (it's much harder than the base metal)
At the points where chains wear (the pins), all the Sachs chains are
hardchromed.
Reminds me of Bernhard Rohloff, explaining (with a big grin) why their gold
plated chain shifts much better...
hajo
Rick Denney
for eight speeds. All their derailleur chains are eight-speed
compatible.
But I'm not sure if they yet have a chain that is _nine-speed_
compatible, although I've heard rumors. I've not made the switch, so I
haven't kept up. Nine-speed chains really are narrower.
At 4.25 pounds, you got a better deal than I did.
On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 12:48:48 GMT, sam...@mimosa.demon.co.uk (Sam Bond)
wrote:
>I want to get a new chain for my recumbent - which means I have to buy 3 to
>get one long enough. The cycle is fitted with an 8 speed Shimano LX gear
>set.
>
>Asking at all my local LBS in the UK I get the answer "I must use an
>8-speed chain" - but it is already fitted with a chain that is just
>labelled "SACHS" with no other designation and looks very much like a PC41.
>When buying 3 chains the price is rather important (I'm not a high
>performance cyclist!-) and the SACHS PC range that I've seen advertised is
>
>PC41 at £4.25
>PC51 at £5.25
>PC80 at £8.95
>PC91 at £12.99
>
>Of course only the more expensive chains are called "8-speed". There seems
>to be a very extensive range of Sachs chains but a hunt through AltaVista
>and DejaNews doesn't yield (for me anyway) and information on the types and
>specs of chains available.
>
>Does Sachs have a web page with specifications hidden anywhere?
>Do I really need an "8-speed" chain - are they really narrower than others
>or is there some other difference?
>
>Sam
Rick Denney
Take what you want and leave the rest.
CV2572
ha...@Quijote.Huellhorst.Zierke.com (Hans-Joachim Zierke) writes:
>> the superior riveting on the SC-M90, however. Also, the plating on the
>links helps
>> reduce wear (it's much harder than the base metal)
>
>At the points where chains wear (the pins), all the Sachs chains are
>hardchromed.
>
>
>
>
>
>Reminds me of Bernhard Rohloff, explaining (with a big grin) why their gold
>plated chain shifts much better...
That sounds like confirmation of my suspicions. My LBS tried to sell me on
the plating as making for superior wear characteristics. Then I learned on rbt
that chains don't wear out at the plates anyway (but at the rollers, natch!)
... now I learn that they plate the roller contact surfaces, so that's no
difference ....
So, aside from the riveting, there is no diff., in terms of durability,
betwixt the PC91/81(cross-step riveting) and PCs 61, 51, and 41 (single step
riveting)? Below 41, there's a difference with respect to treatment of the
steel used in the links ("Delta hardening"). As I said before, I can find no
info. in the Sachs consumer literature that claims any metalurgical superiority
between their different levels of chains. So why would my LBS think this
(rhetorical Q; no answer needed)?
I also see the different chains advertised for "road use" or "mtb use", or
"either", but the specifications state the dimensions to be the same, so all
the chains from PC41 up will work for either road or mtb 8sp systems, though
you're likely to be pressed to buy the more expensive mtb version at your LBS.
So, where's the definitive answer? Any techno-weenie, engineering, bicycle
industry, brain-banks out there? I'm off to my LBS tomorrow, and I'd like to
take some ammo with me.
FWIW, my poser buddy just bought the PC91, to save some weight and because it
looks cool (while I buy 3, not-so-cool models, for the same price). Sachs is
learning their marketing from Mavic! ;-)
BTBTW, I know they pay alot for bike stuff in the UK, but how about those
chain prices!? Much better than I get 'em for (after $$ conversion); $10,
19.50, 28, and 33, repectively.
>PC41 at £4.25
>PC51 at £5.25
>PC80 at £8.95
>PC91 at £12.99
>
Robin Hubert
Hans-Joachim Zierke
CV2572 schrieb:
> So, aside from the riveting, there is no diff., in terms of durability,
> betwixt the PC91/81(cross-step riveting) and PCs 61, 51, and 41 (single step
> riveting)?
The difference is the riveting. Most probably, the better riveting is also
supported by closer tolerances (we talk 1/100 mm in chains). Closer
tolerances _are_ expensive for a chain maker.
For a road rider with machine-friendly shifting habit, there is not much
reason to get anything better than a 41. I buy 41, and for special problem
cases a Rohloff.
> Below 41, there's a difference with respect to treatment of the
> steel used in the links ("Delta hardening").
Yes, cheaper chains as 41 don't have the plated pins, and this is a big
difference in wear.
> FWIW, my poser buddy just bought the PC91, to save some weight and because it
> looks cool (while I buy 3, not-so-cool models, for the same price). Sachs is
> learning their marketing from Mavic! ;-)
Why not? I think the Sachs chains are great. At least they plate the cheap
ones for people like me, while Daido didn't. And if somebody wants to
mistreat a bike, or needs good looks, they have another expensive product.
> BTBTW, I know they pay alot for bike stuff in the UK, but how about those
> chain prices!? Much better than I get 'em for
Nearly all consumer goods are MUCH MUCH more expensive over here. If I want
to buy audio equipment, the DM-$ exchange rate is 2,5:1. So it is nice to
hear about a product that is cheaper in Germany. ;-)
hajo
Matt O'Toole
> For a road rider with machine-friendly shifting habit, there is not much
> reason to get anything better than a 41. I buy 41, and for special problem
> cases a Rohloff.
What does the Rohloff do for you?
> Yes, cheaper chains as 41 don't have the plated pins, and this is a big
> difference in wear.
> Why not? I think the Sachs chains are great. At least they plate the cheap
> ones for people like me, while Daido didn't.
So, that's why those damned things wore out so quickly...
Matt O.
Hans-Joachim Zierke
Matt O'Toole schrieb:
> What does the Rohloff do for you?
On my racing bike, the Sachs rubs the frame in highest gear.
I also like the shifting of the Rohloff when I use friction shifting. (This
does not happen too often.)
And the Rohloff lives a little longer than the Sachs. It does not justify
the extra expense normally, but for a really long trip of 5000+ kilometers,
I'd choose Rohloff to avoid changing the chain during the trip.
Unfortunately, my holidays haven't been long enough for that in the last
years.
hajo
--
Postings passing through the following rogue sites are not transported to the
local domain:
Brian Nystrom
Hans-Joachim Zierke wrote:
> At the points where chains wear (the pins), all the Sachs chains are
> hardchromed.
YOU lose on this one. Mountain bike chains also take a beating from forced shifts. The
plating on the link plates reduces wear and improves shifting over the life of the
chain.
Brian Nystrom
CV2572 wrote:
> That sounds like confirmation of my suspicions. My LBS tried to sell me on
> the plating as making for superior wear characteristics. Then I learned on rbt
> that chains don't wear out at the plates anyway (but at the rollers, natch!)
> ... now I learn that they plate the roller contact surfaces, so that's no
> difference ....
If you're using it on a road bike (or in this case, a recumbent), you're right, the
plating will make little difference unless you're a reall ham-handed shifter.
> I also see the different chains advertised for "road use" or "mtb use", or
> "either", but the specifications state the dimensions to be the same, so all
> the chains from PC41 up will work for either road or mtb 8sp systems, though
> you're likely to be pressed to buy the more expensive mtb version at your LBS.
> So, where's the definitive answer? Any techno-weenie, engineering, bicycle
> industry, brain-banks out there? I'm off to my LBS tomorrow, and I'd like to
> take some ammo with me.
The MTB chains have the strongest riveting and it's my understanding that they are
more flexible laterally, in effect, optimimising them for use on a triple chainring
drivetrain. There is no reason you cannot use an MTB chain on a road bike and they
are probably the best bet for a triple equiped road rig. My experience with a
low-end Sachs road chain (SC-40) on a mountain bike (it was original equipment)
indicate that it's a poor choice. I would expect that the better road chains would
hold up OK, but the MTB chains are no more expensive and much easier to find around
here, so I use them.--
Hans-Joachim Zierke
Brian Nystrom schrieb:
> YOU lose on this one. Mountain bike chains also take a beating from forced shifts. The
> plating on the link plates reduces wear and improves shifting over the life of the
> chain.
That's what Bernie Rohloff once explained: Especially gold plating does a
lot of improvement in this arena.
hms...@concentric.net
inhibits rust over time. Since I ride a lot, and wear out a chain in 1200
miles, they never get a chance to rust.
Hugh Smith
San Jose, CA
CV2572 wrote in message <199808241749...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>In article <slrn6u323...@quijote.Huellhorst.Zierke.com>,
>ha...@Quijote.Huellhorst.Zierke.com (Hans-Joachim Zierke) writes:
>
>>> the superior riveting on the SC-M90, however. Also, the plating on the
>>links helps
>>> reduce wear (it's much harder than the base metal)
>>
>>At the points where chains wear (the pins), all the Sachs chains are
>>hardchromed.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Reminds me of Bernhard Rohloff, explaining (with a big grin) why their
gold
>>plated chain shifts much better...
>
>
> That sounds like confirmation of my suspicions. My LBS tried to sell me
on
>the plating as making for superior wear characteristics. Then I learned on
rbt
>that chains don't wear out at the plates anyway (but at the rollers,
natch!)
>... now I learn that they plate the roller contact surfaces, so that's no
>difference ....
> So, aside from the riveting, there is no diff., in terms of durability,
>betwixt the PC91/81(cross-step riveting) and PCs 61, 51, and 41 (single
step
>riveting)? Below 41, there's a difference with respect to treatment of the
>steel used in the links ("Delta hardening"). As I said before, I can find
no
>info. in the Sachs consumer literature that claims any metalurgical
superiority
>between their different levels of chains. So why would my LBS think this
>(rhetorical Q; no answer needed)?
> I also see the different chains advertised for "road use" or "mtb use",
or
>"either", but the specifications state the dimensions to be the same, so
all
>the chains from PC41 up will work for either road or mtb 8sp systems,
though
>you're likely to be pressed to buy the more expensive mtb version at your
LBS.
> So, where's the definitive answer? Any techno-weenie, engineering,
bicycle
>industry, brain-banks out there? I'm off to my LBS tomorrow, and I'd like
to
>take some ammo with me.
> FWIW, my poser buddy just bought the PC91, to save some weight and
because it
>looks cool (while I buy 3, not-so-cool models, for the same price). Sachs
is
>learning their marketing from Mavic! ;-)
> BTBTW, I know they pay alot for bike stuff in the UK, but how about those